CREW v. CHATMAN et al

Filing 11

ORDER ADOPTING 8 Report and Recommendations. Plaintiff's claim against Defendant Officer Cordero Willis is allowed to proceed. Plaintiff's claims against Defendants Warden Bruce Chatman, Deputy Wardens June Bishop and William Powell, Captain Dewayne Williams, Lieutenant Andrew Russo, Sergeant Pervis, Officer Williams, and Officer Mays are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE MARC THOMAS TREADWELL on 1/13/2017. (tlh)

N THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
MACON DIVISION
DEMARCUS CREW,
Plaintiff,
v.
Officer CORDERO WILLIS, et. al.,

Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:16-CV-201 (MTT)

ORDER
Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Charles H. Weigle’s Recommendation
(Doc. 8) as to Plaintiff Demarcus Crew’s claims against Defendants Warden Bruce
Chatman, Deputy Wardens June Bishop and William Powell, Captain Dewayne
Williams, Lieutenant Andrew Russo, Sergeant Pervis, Officer Cordero Willis, Officer
Williams, and Officer Mays. The Magistrate Judge recommends Crew’s claim against
Officer Willis be allowed to procced but that Crew’s claims against all other Defendants
be DISMISSED. Doc. 8 at 1. Neither party has objected to the Recommendation. The
Court has reviewed the Recommendation, and the Court accepts and adopts the
findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. The
Recommendation is ADOPTED and made the order of this Court.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b), a prisoner complaint should be dismissed if it is:
“(1) frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or (2)
seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.” To state a

claim for relief, a plaintiff must state sufficient facts that associate the defendants with
the alleged wrong. Douglas v. Yates, 535 F.3d 1316, 1321-22 (11th Cir. 2008) (citing
Pamel Corp. v. P.R. Highway Auth., 621 F.2d 33, 36 (1st Cir. 1980) (“[W]e must
demand that the complaint state with some minimal particularity how overt acts of the
defendant caused a legal wrong.”)).
Plaintiff has not stated sufficient facts to associate Defendants Warden Bruce
Chatman, Deputy Wardens June Bishop and William Powell, Captain Dewayne
Williams, Lieutenant Andrew Russo, Sergeant Pervis, Officer Williams, and Officer
Mays with the alleged wrong.1 See Doc. 1. Plaintiff names these Defendants in the
caption of his complaint and when prompted to list each defendant. Doc. 1 at 1, 4.
Beyond that, Plaintiff does not allege misconduct by any defendant or tie his harm to the
actions of any defendant other than Defendant Willis.2 See Docs. 1 at 5; 5. Plaintiff’s
allegation that some of the defendants supervised Defendant Willis cannot support a
claim under § 1983. Hartley v. Parnell, 193 F.3d 1263, 1269 (11th Cir. 1999) (quoting
Belcher v. City of Foley, 30 F.3d 1390, 1396 (11th Cir. 1994) (“[S]upervisory officials are
not liable under § 1983 for the unconstitutional acts of their subordinates ‘on the basis of
respondeat superior or vicarious liability.’”).
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant Officer Cordero Willis is allowed to proceed.
Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants Warden Bruce Chatman, Deputy Wardens June
1

In listing the Defendants to be dismissed, the Recommendation failed to name Officer Mays. See Doc.
1. However, it is clear to the Court from the reasoning of the Recommendation, and based on the Court’s
own review, that the claim against Officer Mays should be dismissed as well.
2

In addition to the physical harm alleged, Plaintiff alleges he is harmed by the inadequacy of the law
library but does not connect this harm to any defendant. Doc. 5.

2

Bishop and William Powell, Captain Dewayne Williams, Lieutenant Andrew Russo,
Sergeant Pervis, Officer Williams, and Officer Mays are DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE.
SO ORDERED, this 13th day of January, 2017.
S/ Marc T. Treadwell
MARC T. TREADWELL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3